Re: schema.org Series generalized, VideoGameSeries added for sdo-venkman release

> I’m probably a voice in the wilderness, but I would be much happier with
a really generic Series as a sub-Type of CreativeWork, with no extra
properties.  Then the currently proposed version being named ‘MediaSeries’
and a sub-Type of Series.

I certainly see your point, and unless the plan is to deprecate TVSeries
and/or RadioSeries, most of the Series properties that have originated with
them could remain with them, "endDate" and "startDate" notwithstanding.  As
discussed above the proposed VideoGameSeries don't seem germane to the
type, and a video game series could be aptly described with CreativeWork
properties.

In reviewing this I also noted that "trailer", through inheritance, would
become a property for VideoGameSeries rather than VideoGame - problematic,
as trailers are indeed produced for individual video games rather than
video game series.  I'd proposed this be moved to become a property of
VideoGame (sometimes this property is off-type - it is also a property for
Movie, even though Movie is not a type of Series).


On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com> wrote:

> Looks great to me.  This is a deft method of handling the serial nature of
> some video game titles, and at the same time is a good move, IMO, toward
> pulling Series from its TV and radio roots and making it a more flexible
> mechanism for describing things in a series.
>
> 1 - VideoGameSeries properties from VideoGame
>
> I did notice the point Jerome Mourits raised:  porting VideoGame
> properties to VideoGameSeries.  As he points out many - if not all - of the
> properties are game- rather than series-specific.
>
> This seems to be modelled on [TV|Radio]Series, where most properties have
> been ported from [TV|Radio]Episode to [TV|Radio]Series - but the model
> doesn't work as well for VideoGame -> VideoGameSeries.
>
> Having said this I don't think the somewhat awkward properties of
> VideoGameSeries represent an impediment - they just don't add particular
> value.
>
> 2 - VideoGame example and hasPart/isPartOf
>
> The newly-added JSON-LD example under VideoGame that employs
> VideoGameSeries is clear, but IMO belongs as an example under the former
> rather than the latter, as the base entity declared is a VideoGameSeries,
> not a VideoGame.
>
> As per the move to generalizing Series, I take it that the inverse - a
> VideoGame described as being part of a series - would use the "isPartOf"
> property, and so avoid the need for recreating the [TV|Radio]Episode
> property "partOfSeries"?
>
> <script type="application/ld+json">
> {
>   "@context": "http://schema.org",
>   "@type": "VideoGame",
>   "name": "Mass Effect 1",
>   "author":"BioWare",
>   "isPartOf": {
>    "@type": "VideoGameSeries",
>    "name": "Mass Effect"
>   }
> }
> </script>
>
> Minor points both - I'm enthusiastic about where this is at!
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Jerome Mourits <jmourits@google.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure I understand the decision to have properties from VideoGame
>> on VideoGameSeries. Pretty much all of the attributes of the series can
>> vary from game-to-game  -- especially things like cheatCodes, quests, items
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The Series + VideoGameSeries update discussed in
>>> https://github.com/rvguha/schemaorg/issues/148 is implemented.
>>>
>>> Please take a look here:
>>>
>>> http://sdo-venkman.appspot.com/Series
>>> http://sdo-venkman.appspot.com/VideoGame
>>> http://sdo-venkman.appspot.com/VideoGameSeries
>>>
>>> cheers,
>>>
>>> Dan
>>>
>>>
>>
>